My how the trolls flock to any pro-android news, like moths to a flame.
Even on Apple-centric sites, they are so insecure that they must thump their chests and tell all how good android is, what they are trying to say is "look androyd is as good as iOS".
In reality they are saying "when the f&$k is my carrier going to upgrade my plasticly piece of s*#t to androyd version 2.x". Well actually never idiot. Why should they ? Makes no business sense to do so.
But makes perfect sense to get you to buy another piece of crap.
Your choice go, but please, oh please can you remove yourselves from our site.

Rubin Android activations seem uninformative to me. I seem to recall Jobs saying that they are activating x-many unique iOS devices per day, with some days exceeding an even higher number. Saying “each day” is ambiguous as to when the ≥ 300k started. For on the past 2 days since before the tweet? For the Black Friady weekend?

PS: Come on people, you know PaiZuri was just baiting you all. Ignore the trolls.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

An iPhone costs around £100 more than the other phones if not more. When you've paid that premium you arn't going to admit something else could be better.

Meh.. Talking about inferiority complex. I had tried some top Android models and I don't think they're better than iPhone at all. Yes, iPhone is more expensive and here Android phones that are more or less the same price just sitting gathering dust while people flocked to buy half the price models.

The original versus the copycats. It's always been that way. It always will be.

The two situations aren't even remotely similar. I don't understand why people keep repeating this meme. Most significantly, the Mac never had the market share in computers that the iPhone has in smart phones, but there are numerous other differences too. It doesn't take a whole lot of thinking and even a casual acquaintance with computing history to see how that comparison doesn't really work. In fact, you can make a far more compelling argument that in this case, Apple is more like Microsoft of yesteryear and Google is the mid-80s Apple, but even that comparison is not entirely without flaws.

The two are similar IMHO in one important aspect; both Google and MS business models rely on market domination. Conversely, Apple's model relies on differentiation within the marketplace.

What I mean is this. Google introduced Android to support its domination of paid search. Mobile was a threat, particularly when Windows Mobile looked strong, because carriers and manufacturers had much more influence over the choice of search engine than on the desktop. If Windows Mobile seized a large chunk of the market, which was conceivable in 2005, they could force everyone to use Bing (or Windows Live Search, or whatever it was called) services. This threatened Google's dominance, so as a defensive move, they developed Android to maintain their market dominance and promote their services. If Bing were to go away entirely, Google would be delighted. It would just mean more revenue for Google and fewer threats. Nothing about this models needs other providers.

This is much like MS's approach and their Windows Tax aspiration. It's well documented and not worth repeating here. Essentially, they wanted Windows everywhere and to kill all competition, which they almost managed.

Apple is different. It has always tried to differentiate itself from others' product offerings by making integrated products that are more usable, more powerful, prettier, cooler, and just plain better than their competitors. They want customers to have choice and to choose them, even if their products won't do everything that everyone wants. Apple relies on being different (or better) and needs others to allow customers to make this relative judgement. Apple needs to operate in a plural marketplace with lots of providers.

I'm always amazed at how Appleinsider is so blatantly biased against Android. They minimize everything about Android that's good. When I compare this site to, say, AndroidCentral.com, this difference is stark. At AndroidCentral, they don't bash the iPhone and minimize iOS. Sure, they compare, but they don't minimize.

I really don't understand why iOS-centric people are so afraid of Android. Sure, Android will soon dominate the market but what this does is forces Apple to make an even better iPhone. Isn't that what anyone would want? If iPhone were still the only desirable device as it was 1.5 years ago, then it wouldn't have the features it has today, such as multitasking (limited though it is), camera flash, and so on. The "Droid Does" campaign drove Steve Jobs crazy, but to which he responded with a better iPhone4 (even though consumer reports still won't recommend it).

Not sure about Android Central , but there are other
AnDroid Sites that the Apple bashing is very bad on.
There are many Android Fanboi's that go out of there way to bash
anything Apple does without even taking a look at the product.

I am fairly neutral when it comes to technology.
Windows Vista PC, MacBook Pro, Droid X Phone , iPhone 3G
Each device can serve its purpose but Apple products are for the most part a
more finished product, that you can depend on.

I have already needed a factory reset on the Droid X just so the stock music player would work. I wont go into all the other problems i have had with Android.

The name of the game is: which company will be principally responsible for shaping the future of mobile computing? And in that game, installed base is everything. All the hackneyed arguments about "profit" or "fragmentation" are just subterfuge with regard to the "big picture."

As has been mentioned before, the # of "activations" being discussed is iOS devices (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, and possibly Apple TV if they wanted to pad their #'s) versus Android Market-enabled devices (Smartphones, Galaxy Tab devices).

Take away from that what you will, but it's clear that Android will soon surpass iPhone in total smartphone installed base in North America if it hasn't already. Global smartphone install base won't be far behind.

I'm looking forward to reports in a few weeks from independent marketing research firms like comScore and Gartner on the latest smartphone figures for November.

WHO F'ing CARES? No, really?

Android is being placed on just about every smartphone coming out that is not an iPhone. It's naturally going to overtake Apple, but it simple does not matter. Why? Because there are PLENTY of folks who are happy to be dialed into the clean Apple ecosystem, so Apple will continue to sell iPhones by the boatload. When the phone is offered on Verizon, you will see a nice bump in sales. Android will still outpace the iPhone, but once again it doesn't matter.

Apple is doing exactly what they need to do and are being rewarded with sales that have valued the company as #2 in the world.

I totally agree - my parents were incredibly excited when they realized that while the UI and performance may not be consistent, and the app selection is more limited and apps may or may not work well on their devices, that they could issue the above commands to compile their own kernel. I assume that's the main draw on GoogleTV as well?

So basically the only other tweet Rubin had was to counter Jobs, and then he totally missed the point of what the argument was. Nice.

"We did not enter the search business, Jobs said. They entered the phone business. Make no mistake they want to kill the iPhone. We wont let them, he says. Someone else asks something on a different topic, but theres no getting Jobs off this rant. I want to go back to that other question first and say one more thing, he says. This dont be evil mantra: Its bullshit.

"We did not enter the search business, Jobs said. They entered the phone business. Make no mistake they want to kill the iPhone. We wont let them, he says. Someone else asks something on a different topic, but theres no getting Jobs off this rant. I want to go back to that other question first and say one more thing, he says. This dont be evil mantra: Its bullshit.

Ah, the proof that Google wants to kill the iphone is a quote from Jobs saying that Google wants to kill the iPhone.

Can anyone explain to me how the upcoming Chrome OS fits into this? Is google going to replace Android with this when it comes out? Wont that confuse users? Good new for Apple has this will make yet another OS in the sea, keeping one from dominating the market.

Did you actually read the article? The part where it said that it's estimated that there are 340,000 iOS devices activated a day.

The other part, that's 300,000 free Android devices, which makes Google a whopping $0/unit. Whereas Apple's making money on every device.

You just fell hook/line/sinker for this author's one sided claim.

Every wonder why non-channel Android devices don't have access to the Marketplace? Think about that for 2 seconds.... maybe 2 minutes if you are a brainwashed fanboi. Remember those $100 android tablets that showed up at kmart or walmart? Try one of those as an example.

I wonder if there's any licensing to use google products, such as maps, browsers, marketplace, etc. I'll bet the author missed that point.

Plus ios (not the Cisco OS) devices include music only devices, which are hardly feature phones. They only fragment the Apple line even more. Apple is clever here to class all ios into their "activations", as that just means an itunes account. It helps inflate their numbers.

The reason they are so worked up is because apple fan boys are used to being the 'cool' little guy in the corner. With the iPhone and iOS they have in the space of a few years become the big guy centre stage. Now they're shit scared of (inevitable though it is) becoming the 'cool' little guy in the corner again.

It's amazing how everyone here believes google just copy apple too. Without 'droid does' I wonder if steve would have even bothered with their poor implementation of multi-tasking.

This activation rate is only going to accelerate when honey-comb i.e android optimised for tablets starts letting decent android tablets pop up everywhere.

So you're surprised that a site called AppleInsider is biased towards Apple?

Wow. This article reeks of desperation. What happened to the attitude that market share doesn't matter? I guess now that Android has basically caught up the new line of discussion is to throw anything and everything at the wall that shows Android is not "successful".

First, there's the, "It doesn't make any/enough money line." Really? So a company that sells ads is not beating out a company that sells hardware and software bundled together. Stop the presses! What a revelation. DED is a genius.

As for Android being given away for free....the OS is given away for free. Google's proprietary apps (GMail, Android Market, etc.) are not. Google charges for those. And if they are activating 300 000 Android devices a day ( of which 95%+ are still only smartphones), then it's quite likely that Android's development costs are being paid for by licensing costs for Google's apps alone (even it's $1 per phone). Heck, they'd be making a good chunk of change at 214 000 activations per day. Even Andy Rubin says it's profitable. And more profitable and viable than it would have been without Google's backing according to him. Somehow, I think the guy who founded the company must know about its financials.

And let's say they actually gave away Android for free? So what? That's their business model. Seems to work well damn well for them on all their cloud centric businesses....to which incidentally Android drives a lot of traffic. Just because it can't work for Apple doesn't mean nobody else should be able to try out that strategy. The defensiveness on here borders on hysterical at times.

Be glad for the competition. I really wonder how good the iPhone 4 would have been if the Android truck hadn't been bearing down on iOS. And where would Apple's cloud strategy be without Google offering serious competition in that space. I'm glad Apple and Google broke up. It's better for me as a consumer that they compete. I'll bet the threat of Android has advanced Apple's development cycle by at least a year if not more. Jobs would have been happy to simply user cheaper tech, spread out his development cycle and rake in more profits per unit. I'll bet that this is what pisses him off about Android. It makes him work harder. If Apple goes dual core next year, throws in near field communications and super AMOLED screens, you can thank Android for that. Conversely, I'm grateful for the superb UI in iOS that keeps pushing Google to improve Android's usability. Just look at how much Android's UI and UX have improved in a year. There's no way that would have happened without competition from Android.

And smartphones wouldn't be getting commodotized if it wasn't for Android. People like to crow about how little profits the Android OEMs make. Except they still make more than they did when they sold dumbphones (heck Motorola's survival is entirely because of Android....the iPhone killed their cash cow: the RAZR line) and as their products get commodotized, they're putting high end smartphones within reach of more and more of the world's population everyday. All this driven by a free mobile OS, given away by an internet search (primarily) company. If Apple was the sole innovator in this space, nobody would be getting highly capable touchscreen smartphones for free on contract. Nor would any of them cost $500-$600 contract free.

All this brings me to my prediction...a Verizon iPhone won't change much at all. Verizon could add 20 000 activations a day to Apple's iOS count. But Android will probably have widened the gap by that much or more by the time the iPhone launches on Verizon. Especially as Android Honeycomb kicks off the Android Tablet run. But in the end do these numbers matter? If I'm a Verizon customer, I'd be happy to just get more choice. Now I get to choose between the iPhone, Blackberries, Windows Phone 7 and Android. Who could be against being spoiled by choices?

Except for Android is installed on most phones given away for free, on two for one offers or on $10 handsets - greater market share != success.

Android should be outselling iOS by massive margins - that it is only just keeping up is appalling - they're giving this OS away and it can still only just keep ahead?

As a businessman, I'd rather sell three units at $300 than nine units at $10 and give even more away for free...

You're a terrible businssman if you don't understand the difference in business paradigms bet you and your competitor. Android's almost a loss-leader for Google. Those 300 000 activations a day...are 300 000 more pairs of eyeballs for Google Search, GMail, Google Maps, Google Latitude. And Google doesn't have to invest in hardware development. They just have to make the OS. There's not even much incremental expenditure on their other services. Spend on Android and drive customers towards Google's cloud services.

As for giving away handsets for free...that's not Google, or the OEMs (who get full price for their handsets), that's the carriers. For that small discount of $100-$200 on a handset they get to upsell a two year data contract. That must be a really hard concept for a businessman to understand: the upsell.

All this brings me to my prediction...a Verizon iPhone won't change much at all. Verizon could add 20 000 activations a day to Apple's iOS count.

It will change more than you think has Verizon will now promote iphones at there stores with ads. Going from pushing and promoting android to promoting iphones will make a huge impact on total iphone sales.

In canada you see big iphone 4 posters at every cell phone shops. That changed things in terms of visibility.

And I think Google is going to push ChromeOS on tablets so dont expect Android to take too much "activations" in that market. On the other hand, they are both Google OS. With RIM, windows, iOs, Android and ChromeOS, we are in for one hell of a ride in the next years. imo fragmetation helps Apple a lot, the only thing Apple need to fear is one coming out the winner.

Has long has the market stays fragmented, Apple is going to keep being the biggest phone/tablet company and by far the most profitable one.

Walt: I notice more and more they are taking on the personality of the carrier, not Google, not the handset maker. There are lots of what I would call craplets. Verizon, for example, swapped out Google for Bing. Is there a danger it is being taken over?

Rubin: That’s the nature of open. That’s actually a feature of Android.

I can see Rubin in early American history clamoring for freedom for mankind against the oppressive British while keeping slaves and not seeing how there is a difference or an injustice. It sounds like Android is only open for the HW vendors and carriers who can then shackle the device in ways that adversely affect users in bizarre ways that defy any definition of “open" I know of.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

You are being tracked just like you are when you do a Google search.
Soylent Green is People.
There's Tuberculosis in the free blankets.
Cell phones cause Cancer.
Don't take candy from a stranger.
I'd charge at least a dollar for the OS and either buy the staff lunch, OR give some of it away to Charity! When something goes wrong, who are you going to send a "class action" lawsuit to?

Actually it's Android phones + Tablet (not plural). The only tablet that connects to the Android Market (and that's where these stats are from) is the Samsung Galaxy Tab.

Quote:

Originally Posted by womble2k2

However, I do believe that these numbers must be including upgrades and re-activations following device resets,

You're wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by womble2k2

...otherwise you would see in the real world that there are almost as many people with Android devices as iOS devices.

I live in London, and on a daily commute will spot a large proportion of people travelling on public transport on IPhones, listening to or playing with iPod Touches and a few times a week I see people with iPads.

For those who don't have iPhones, the majority of others are Nokia and Blackberry phones and I've never see anyone on trains / public transport here with any other type of tablet device.

Then when I look at my cirle of friends and work colleagues, I would say that 90% have either iPhones, Nokia Symbian and Blackberry devices. Only a handful of people I know have jumped onto the Android platform.

Your bias is compelling you to mix up the concept of market share and installed base. Android has only taken off this year. You can't really expect them to beat out 3 years worth of iPhone sales, and countless years of Nokia and Blackberry sales in one shot. Not to mention the fact that being in the UK, you actually got the better Androids months after they did in the US (just like us here in Canada...and we were later than you).

This time next year, you'll be seeing a lot more Androids on your Tube ride into work....

Quote:

Originally Posted by womble2k2

I personally see no complelling reason to opt for an Android device other than the price. Yes, there are a few features that would be nice to have, but nothing outstanding.

What concerns me more are getting software upgrades as they are released. My previous device was a Vodafone branded Nokia N95 8GB. It frustrated me that;
1. Vodafone would drag they feet at getting the latest release of firmware to the phone.
2. Even if I opted to re-code the phone to take the UK generic firmware, it was still often months behind other international releases.

What I see with Android is even worse. Each Android handset manufacturer seems to take an age to get updates to the phone. Just look at how many devices are 1.x, 2.1, etc.

~15% are at 1.x. I'd venture to say that's probably the same proportion of iPhone 2G and iPhone 3G owners active in the iOS ecosystem who don't have the latest OS. And something like 40% of Androids are on 2.1. Yet as far as apps go, there really aren't that many that require 2.1, and I can only really think of 2 apps that require 2.2 (Flash and Skype). Even the new and fantastic Google Maps for Mobile 5 which uses vector graphics only needs Android 1.6. And speaking of Android 2.2. Just look at how fast phones have been upgraded to that standard. Over half the installed base will be on 2.2 by Christmas. Contrary to popular belief, fragmentation is actually getting better, not worse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by womble2k2

As for Google not making any money from the platform, well, which company would invest so much resource, money and time into a platform if they didn't have a revenue stream coming from it.

Another genius who doesn't understand Google's business paradigm for Android.

And they do have a revenue stream. The OS is free. But you have to pay to license all of Google's proprietary apps including the Android Market.

You can just imagine the bitter fanboys tears streaming from your face...

300,000 Android phones a day comes out to about 110 million a year 27 million a quarter.

Google is now outselling Nokia's 26.5 million for last quarter.

Apple only sold 14 million phones last quarter. Android is almost doubling iPhone sales. That is some epic ownage of Apple by Google.

This is an Apple friendly site, why are you on here ? Don't you have anything better to do, than to annoy people ? Perhaps you should go onto an android friendly site and bask in the false glory.
I like how you confuse OS and phones, did you bother to read the article let alone allow some of the information to permeate into your brain cells ?
Apple is still ahead with OS activations, and this 300,000 figure being touted includes updates and not new OS devices, so its very mis-leading and down right a lie.
Anyway laugh now, because soon WP7 (piece of crap as it is), will soon start devouring into android market share, so have a nice trip to the bottom of the profit barrel.

Now that's what I'm talking about!

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Rabbit

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhammy

I'm always amazed at how Appleinsider is so blatantly biased against Android. They minimize everything about Android that's good. When I compare this site to, say, AndroidCentral.com, this difference is stark. At AndroidCentral, they don't bash the iPhone and minimize iOS. Sure, they compare, but they don't minimize.

I really don't understand why iOS-centric people are so afraid of Android. Sure, Android will soon dominate the market but what this does is forces Apple to make an even better iPhone. Isn't that what anyone would want? If iPhone were still the only desirable device as it was 1.5 years ago, then it wouldn't have the features it has today, such as multitasking (limited though it is), camera flash, and so on. The "Droid Does" campaign drove Steve Jobs crazy, but to which he responded with a better iPhone4 (even though consumer reports still won't recommend it).

Really ? Do you bother counting the trolls and Apple haters who have parked their stinking carcasses on our site and refuse to move. DuhHardon is the a perfect example. He was almost creaming in his blue ringers about the new mottorolli tablet just the other day.
So pardon me for bashing android, but we Apple fans have good reason to, and it has been commented about so many times, but you android fans are just deaf to reason and logic.
So we bash you another way.
So don't go around crying foul buddy boy.

You are being tracked just like you are when you do a Google search.
Soylent Green is People.
There's Tuberculosis in the free blankets.
Cell phones cause Cancer.
Don't take candy from a stranger.
I'd charge at least a dollar for the OS and either buy the staff lunch, OR give some of it away to Charity! When something goes wrong, who are you going to send a "class action" lawsuit to?

Everyone in the western world is being tracked. It doesn't matter what fuckin phone you have. This is not a valid argument whatsoever.

The two are similar IMHO in one important aspect; both Google and MS business models rely on market domination. Conversely, Apple's model relies on differentiation within the marketplace.

What I mean is this. Google introduced Android to support its domination of paid search. Mobile was a threat, particularly when Windows Mobile looked strong, because carriers and manufacturers had much more influence over the choice of search engine than on the desktop. If Windows Mobile seized a large chunk of the market, which was conceivable in 2005, they could force everyone to use Bing (or Windows Live Search, or whatever it was called) services. This threatened Google's dominance, so as a defensive move, they developed Android to maintain their market dominance and promote their services. If Bing were to go away entirely, Google would be delighted. It would just mean more revenue for Google and fewer threats. Nothing about this models needs other providers.

This is much like MS's approach and their Windows Tax aspiration. It's well documented and not worth repeating here. Essentially, they wanted Windows everywhere and to kill all competition, which they almost managed.

Apple is different. It has always tried to differentiate itself from others' product offerings by making integrated products that are more usable, more powerful, prettier, cooler, and just plain better than their competitors. They want customers to have choice and to choose them, even if their products won't do everything that everyone wants. Apple relies on being different (or better) and needs others to allow customers to make this relative judgement. Apple needs to operate in a plural marketplace with lots of providers.

So, Apple is not like MS, but Google is.

Long-time lurked, first-time poster. Hi everyone.

What you seem to be forgetting is that google make a huge amount of money off mobile advertising through your precious IPHONE too. Android is out there to ensure no one company ends up with a closed operating system on phones. It benefits everyone.